Slowing The Climate Crisis

Our core direction is to stop the export of fossil fuels from Oregon and surrounding areas, because they represent large-footprint projects who's main purpose is to grow
the fossil fuel market – which must shrink, not grow.

Nov. 12, 2015 (Portland, OR): The Portland City Council voted 5-0 to pass a landmark resolution opposing all projects that increase the transportation or storage of all fossil fuels in Portland or in its adjacent waterways. This resolution is the most far-reaching of its kind in the country. It encompasses all fossil fuel types; it directs the City to codify the language into law; and it includes strong language around a “just transition” for workers economically dislocated by the city’s change to a clean, sustainable economy.

The resolution is the product of grassroots activists adamantly opposing all new coal, oil and gas projects. “Today’s resolution marks the outcome of grassroots resistance to all new fossil fuel infrastructure going mainstream. For years, groups like Rising Tide, Columbia Riverkeeper and 350PDX have been fighting all new large-scale fossil fuel projects in order to stave off the worst of the climate crisis and protect life on this planet as we know it. This is a huge victory for the movement and for climate stability,” said 350PDX’s climate organizer Mia Reback.

“Portland Mayor Charlie Hales is breaking the climate gridlock at the national and international level, showing us that cities and local governments can lead the way, powered by local grassroots activists,” said Adriana Voss-Andreae, director of 350PDX.

Today’s resolution builds on recent victories cemented by climate justice activists in Portland including: Defeating a proposed propane export terminal in the spring of 2015; blockading Shell Oil’s Arctic icebreaker, The Fennica, for 48 hours in the summer of 2015, galvanizing public attention and support to keep the Arctic off limits to all oil and gas drilling; and recent resolutions to get the City of Portland to divest from fossil fuels and oppose oil trains.

The resolution is supported by community and environmental groups including 350PDX, Portland Audubon Society, Center for Sustainable Economy, member groups of the Climate Action Coalition, and Columbia Riverkeeper; and by the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission, Confederated Tribes of the Grande Ronde, and Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs.

“President Obama was the first president in history to reject a pipeline, the Keystone XL, based on its climate impact, but Portland Mayor Hales is the first mayor in history to reject all new fossil fuel infrastructure in his city on its health, safety and climate impact,” said Daphne Wysham, director of the climate and energy program with Center for Sustainable Economy. “Both leaders understand we have no time to waste: We must say ‘no’ to all new fossil fuel infrastructure if we are to leave 80 percent of proven fossil fuel reserves in the ground as science requires of us and say ‘yes’ to the just transition to a clean economy we all need.”

“This new fossil fuel policy is the result of many years of consciousness-raising activism throughout the Pacific Northwest,” says Nicholas Caleb of CSE. “It’s exactly the type of action we need to respond to the climate crisis and can be replicated throughout the region as we commit to a transition to a clean energy economy.”

Climate leaders around the world are looking to Portland and applauding the resolution. Bill McKibben, global climate leader and co-founder of 350.org, testified in support of the resolutions. “Portland is getting down to brass tacks–’no new fossil fuel infrastructure’ is the right rallying cry for this moment in history, a stand that would galvanize the rest of the planet and demonstrate where the future lies,” said Bill McKibben. “This is an exciting moment!”

“The tides are clearly turning: from the global movement to divest from fossil fuel companies to the tune of $2.6 trillion, to major victories at the national level, such as getting a U.S. president to stop a major fossil fuel infrastructure project for the first time in pulling the plug on Keystone XL, to the local level such as this landmark victory today.” says Voss-Andreae of 350PDX “It’s a powerful sign that the the fossil fuel era is beginning to come to an end and that we are the change we’ve been looking for”.

Portland, OR, City Council Will Vote On Resolution Opposing New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure

Portland, OR: The Portland City Council is set to vote on a resolution opposing new fossil fuel infrastructure on November 12th at 2pm (Resolution 1157). The resolution will be the strongest local fossil fuel infrastructure ban in the country. The hearing is scheduled to last for three hours, and the City Council will hear testimony on proposed amendments from Commissioners Nick Fish and Steve Novick before the City Council votes on the resolution. The hearing can be watched via livestream here: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/video/player/?tab=live

Community leaders will be available for interviews before and after the hearing.

What: Portland City Council Hearing and Vote on the Fossil Fuel Resolution

When: Thursday November 12th, 2-5 PM

Where: Portland City Hall

The Fossil Fuel Resolution follows the passage of a resolution to oppose new oil train traffic in Portland. The resolution also allows the City of Portland to go on record opposing the proposed TesoroSavage Oil Terminal in nearby Vancouver, WA, which would be the nation’s largest oil-by-rail terminal.

Community Groups including members of the Climate Action Coalition and 350PDX plan to fill City Hall on Thursday with creative visuals to show support for this landmark resolution. The Fossil Fuel Resolution is being supported by community and environmental groups including 350PDX, Portland Audubon Society, Center for Sustainable Economy, member groups of the Climate Action Coalition, and Columbia Riverkeeper; and by the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission, Confederated Tribes of the Grande Ronde, and Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs.

###

Shell No!

Shell Oil's efforts to drill for yet more oil in Alaska didn't make sense, since there is already more than 5 times as much fossil fuel reserves as we can possibly afford to burn. A risky project in a sensitive ecosystem for unneeded oil doesn't make sense. So, we let them know that.

Interestingly, Shell and the industry are starting to get pushed in the right direction. See:

Oregon's Horrible Plans for LNG export

There are two separate export terminals planned in Oregon, and we will be trying to help get those cancelled. In each case they represent high-carbon-footprint attempts to sell fossil fuels to new markets – attempts to grow sales where that should be shrinking, instead.

We have a list of activities including hearings for permits on these two terminals on our event calendar.

Yes! Divestment grows, locally!

(An alternate view to the Oregonian Editorial Board)

The mood was celebratory in Portland City Council chambers Thursday as the City Council voted 4-0 to place the top 200 fossil fuel companies on the city's do-not-buy investments list. (Commissioner Amanda Fritz was absent.)

As Eric Means of the Portland chapter of Citizens Climate Lobby pointed out, it was a largely symbolic move. But symbolism counts. Since the survival of the species is dependent on the greater community rejecting the ongoing use of fossil fuels, statements of rejection actually do make a difference. Yes, climate-aware citizens DO vote according to the positions their representatives take. We will be looking for politicians with a bent toward greening the planet.

The financial dynamics of the oil and gas industry are a lot more complicated than the vote taken by the Council, but they are feeling the pinch. As noted in the New York Times, the oil industry has decreased its investment rate by 20% this year. Search for new reserves have retreated from the North Sea, West Africa, and shale propects in the US. Half of the drilling rigs have been idled in the last year. Production is beginning to drop, but there is still oversupply. In spite of predictions that oil prices would bottom out at $50 a barrel, they have continued down.

Over recent years, investments in fossil fuels have generally lost money, not made money. Coal has hurt first, but it is spreading.

Also voting their disapproval of growth in fossil fuels: A growing number of cities worldwide – including nearby cities such as San Francisco, Seattle, Eugene, Corvallis and Ashland – already have taken steps to divest.

Divestment is two things: (1) protection against the coming downturn (“last man holding the bag” syndrome); and (2) a moral statement about the societal benefits of such investments. Withdrawal of investments is one of several political tools used to bring pressure on the fossil fuel industry. In order for pension funds to sell fossil fuel stocks, there has to be someone else who wants to buy the stocks. So far, there are buyers, but fewer, over time. International banks are already recommending that investors shy away from fossil fuel investments.

It is obvious that in a time of transition, there will be plenty of use of the old fuels, even as there is increasing use of the new fuels. It is not hypocritical to be a part of that transition – both increasing use of green energy, and decreasing (but not yet to zero) use of carbon based fuels.

There are pragmatic approaches to making the switch that include many incremental steps. We need to address a wide range of opportunities that contribute to reduction of carbon pollution. Building HVAC/insulation efficiencies, solar panels both in central farms and distributed to building roofs, creating larger park-and-rides so commuters could drive for part of their commute and ride light rail trains for the rest instead of driving the entire distance, use of more efficient automobiles. All these are within the idealistic and realistic possibilities for reducing carbon emissions.

Every household, and every company has the opportunity to make his part of the difference. Indeed, in the end, it is the sum of all those differences that might save our future generations. That is why we MUST NOT just say; “but maybe China won't do it's part, so why should we?” When Portland, or Multnomah County, or Seattle, or the Unitarians, or the Pope get on board and say; “The moral answer is to go green, so let's figure out how to do it”, each step helps generate the momentum in the right direction.